H&S tuners gone!

[HS Performance]

Originally Posted by THEFERMANATOR

The difference is the LML was the uncrackable ECM that was locked down and can only be read by either using a ILLIGALLY obtained copy of teh tune file, OR by opening teh ECM up and installing a jumper to allow a read off of teh ECM board. GM went to great lengths to stop tuning to get the EPA off there back, so when one showed up tuned you can bet it got the EPA's attention in a HURRY!

And up until the LML, a tuner could read out YOUR stock tune file from YOUR ECM. then it would modify that tune file and flash the modified version of YOUR tune file back in keeping you in the legal realm of software laws. This is the SOLE reason why EFILIVE did not ever offer support for the LML was YOUR specific tune file cannot be read out through the OBDII port. The only way to obtain the tune file was either through a blatant breach of the software license(bootleg like napster shall we say), or to open teh ECM and install a jumper and hook into the inside of the ECM. There is a very LENGTHY discussion on this over at the EFILIVE forum regarding the legality of it.

So in all reality, I could flash MY ECM using a GM tool with any combination of calibration files for any GM VIN, then read them back off MY ECM, and I would be abiding by the law? That would be great, because then each tuning device could be pre-loaded with all base calibration files necessary (obtained from reading MY ECM). All of this without ever violating a software license agreement!

Or perhaps there are devices that could be installed inline with a GM tool, and obtain the software before it even goes onto the ECM, as it is being flashed? I wonder if that is a viable solution for obtaining any calibration file ever made by GM? That would save some time from reading the ECM, and should still abide by a license agreement, right?

Automotive manufacturers have been using RSA encryption for years, and most of the time someone will break it. Is it difficult, YES. But can it be done, FOR SURE. Is this the reason the EPA is regulating diesel emissions? I guess it could be part of it. But I think the bigger part is that multiple companies were making devices that were being used illegally to remove emissions equipment from thousands of over the road vehicles for over 10 years. Is it the manufacturers fault that their products were being used illegally? I think not, but the government says otherwise. The clean air act states that if a company "knows, or should have known" that a product was being used illegally, they can not produce it any longer. This creates a whole can of worms if you ask me. Does GM know their trucks are used to drive drunk, or speed? Probably..... So where does the buck stop?

Originally Posted by THEFERMANATOR

EFILIVE is a CUSTOM tuning software suite that allows you to download YOUR tune file, and then custom modify. There is no simple magic button you push to disable the DPF on an LMM. It isn't a hard process to do, but you still have to modify it yourself and know how and where to do it in the tune file.

So you are saying that making the switch harder to flip changes the legalities of the product. Instead of flipping 1 switch you have to switch 25 of them and alter 6 other random values, then that somehow makes it legal? Again, explain where the gray area is left and one crosses a line from legal to illegal. This and many other very in depth conversations have been and will continue to be discussed by the EPA and multiple tuning companies. Will a solution be found? Yes, I have no doubts. Will arguing about it through an online diesel forum change anything, I doubt it. Will pointing finger of blame to young punks blowing smoke change anything, nope. The people involved are working towards a solution, and hopefully it will be beneficial to the diesel performance community as well as our environment.

We at H&S like a clean atmosphere just as much as the next guy, and are happy to move forward towards a solution. With time and experience we have no doubts that performance gains while maintaining emissions system functions will improve. We are learning new things with each new model year and the diesel emissions system is becoming more robust and efficient. Engine calibration file size has nearly tripled in the last 5 years, consisting an amazing system of multiple redundancy checks and fault management systems. Not to mention multiple times more fueling, air, and emissions management tables to switch between based on hundreds of sensor inputs and modeled logic. We are excited to see where things progress for 2014 and beyond.

Originally Posted by chevyinlinesix

There's no such thing as bad publicity

I agree 100%. The method in which that publicity is responded to can make or break a company though.

[FC5452]

Originally Posted by THEFERMANATOR

The difference is the LML was the uncrackable ECM that was locked down and can only be read by either using a ILLIGALLY obtained copy of teh tune file, OR by opening teh ECM up and installing a jumper to allow a read off of teh ECM board. GM went to great lengths to stop tuning to get the EPA off there back, so when one showed up tuned you can bet it got the EPA's attention in a HURRY!



And up until the LML, a tuner could read out YOUR stock tune file from YOUR ECM. then it would modify that tune file and flash the modified version of YOUR tune file back in keeping you in the legal realm of software laws. This is the SOLE reason why EFILIVE did not ever offer support for the LML was YOUR specific tune file cannot be read out through the OBDII port. The only way to obtain the tune file was either through a blatant breach of the software license(bootleg like napster shall we say), or to open teh ECM and install a jumper and hook into the inside of the ECM. There is a very LENGTHY discussion on this over at the EFILIVE forum regarding the legality of it.

Correct as was the same for the M$ kernel in Windows, with each new version came new security measures, and people read those and circumvented those procedures. Iphones were supposed to be "hack Proof" as well, everyone jail broke them as well, you were not supposed to be able to do it. It was done. I follow your point and I started reading all the hub bub over at EFI on this as well, it all comes down to pointing fingers.
This is a billion dollar industry and one can put the pieces together on how this all came down. He said she said is what it all comes down to.

[clarkely]

So are we to believe the epa was only worried about making the gm ecm un breakable...... But didn't care about fords or dodges?

Seems they would want them all un breakable..... All untenable........ Or just gm?

Ships dumping tons of pollutants..... But registered overseas..... Can't be touched..... Well I guess embargoes would help that...... Then this gs would cost to much here..... It's a political game..... Nothing more..... Nothing less.....

Sent from my SGH-T999 using AutoGuide App

[mxracer]

Can't wait for the updates to the LML platform H&S

Really looking forward to MCC.

Appreciate what you guys are doing.

BTW some of you guys should REALLY take a closer look at IP laws. Especially when it comes to software. All I'll say is you don't "own" chit. Hell 1/2 of the software I've written over the last 20 years I don't own.

[clarkely]

X2 on H&S getting things done

[FC5452]

I just wanted to ask the opinion if Bench flashing vers being able to read out of the OBD port is so wrong, Then why is the tech being sought after by other Companies. This practice has been done for years. Even with encryption being added other MFG's are continuing to pursue it on the new platform. And it is being very well publicized. So to me What has been done now as in the past is a mute point.
Not trying to stir a Sh** storm here, but reading and flashing a system has been and will be a common practice for years to come. The real issue and I would have to agree with Pilot a few months back are the hidden gasses in the smoke that no one sees.

[THEFERMANATOR]

Originally Posted by HS Performance

So in all reality, I could flash MY ECM using a GM tool with any combination of calibration files for any GM VIN, then read them back off MY ECM, and I would be abiding by the law? That would be great, because then each tuning device could be pre-loaded with all base calibration files necessary (obtained from reading MY ECM). All of this without ever violating a software license agreement! So long as you don't redistribute it and only use it in YOUR ECM, then yes it's legal from my understanding of it. Once you distribute it your in the realm of bootleg copying sort of like NAPSTER did way back(and we seen how the open file sharing worked for them).

Or perhaps there are devices that could be installed inline with a GM tool, and obtain the software before it even goes onto the ECM, as it is being flashed? I wonder if that is a viable solution for obtaining any calibration file ever made by GM? That would save some time from reading the ECM, and should still abide by a license agreement, right? This would be the same as bootleg copying from my understanding of it.


Automotive manufacturers have been using RSA encryption for years, and most of the time someone will break it. Is it difficult, YES. But can it be done, FOR SURE. Is this the reason the EPA is regulating diesel emissions? I guess it could be part of it. But I think the bigger part is that multiple companies were making devices that were being used illegally to remove emissions equipment from thousands of over the road vehicles for over 10 years. Is it the manufacturers fault that their products were being used illegally? I think not, but the government says otherwise. The clean air act states that if a company "knows, or should have known" that a product was being used illegally, they can not produce it any longer. This creates a whole can of worms if you ask me. Does GM know their trucks are used to drive drunk, or speed? Probably..... So where does the buck stop? I'm no software designer or master of encryption. My understanding was the portion of teh software to allow the internal memory to be read was left out on purpose so the ECM cannot be read. You can do a checksum check, but not an actual read of the tune file.





So you are saying that making the switch harder to flip changes the legalities of the product. Instead of flipping 1 switch you have to switch 25 of them and alter 6 other random values, then that somehow makes it legal? Again, explain where the gray area is left and one crosses a line from legal to illegal. This and many other very in depth conversations have been and will continue to be discussed by the EPA and multiple tuning companies. Will a solution be found? Yes, I have no doubts. Will arguing about it through an online diesel forum change anything, I doubt it. Will pointing finger of blame to young punks blowing smoke change anything, nope. The people involved are working towards a solution, and hopefully it will be beneficial to the diesel performance community as well as our environment. I never said making it harder to flip the switch was legal. Defeating the emissions controls is illegal for any road registered vehicle, wether you do it with electronic foolers or programming it is still illegal to do it on a road registered vehicle.

We at H&S like a clean atmosphere just as much as the next guy, and are happy to move forward towards a solution. With time and experience we have no doubts that performance gains while maintaining emissions system functions will improve. We are learning new things with each new model year and the diesel emissions system is becoming more robust and efficient. Engine calibration file size has nearly tripled in the last 5 years, consisting an amazing system of multiple redundancy checks and fault management systems. Not to mention multiple times more fueling, air, and emissions management tables to switch between based on hundreds of sensor inputs and modeled logic. We are excited to see where things progress for 2014 and beyond. I'm glad you are finally past your proof of concept video and rolling coal.



I agree 100%. The method in which that publicity is responded to can make or break a company though.

In red. And i'm not saying your solely responsible for the recent outbreak of regulations(I have said this all along), BUT your videos sure didn't help as they got ALOT of attention in regards to the untuneable truck being tuned and blacking out the roadway. the root problem is we need to change public perception of what is accepteable, and what people think of in regards to diesels. It will be interesting to see what happens down the road over this matter as it took almost 2 years before EDGE got fined.

[PrivatePilot]

Originally Posted by mxracer

BTW some of you guys should REALLY take a closer look at IP laws. Especially when it comes to software. All I'll say is you don't "own" chit. Hell 1/2 of the software I've written over the last 20 years I don't own.

Here's a question: Does a brand new GM vehicle come with part of the bill of sale or a manual somewhere with what amounts to an EULA?

When you buy software, despite the mentality of many that you now "own" the software and can therefore do with it as you please, that is NOT the case since the EULA was something you agreed to upon opening the box (read all those little stickers and warnings), or upon downloading (read all the text that you clicked "OK" on), therefore you are not allowed to screw with the software. You may USE it within its design limitations, but usually can't change it or reverse engineer it.

I'm curious if vehicles, given the amount of computers they are now equipped with, include the same contractual obligations/agreements as part of the bill of sale signatures, or somewhere else in the paperwork.

A bit OT, but interesting from a legal perspective for the tuning side of things.

[Surfacediver]

Originally Posted by PrivatePilot

Here's a question: Does a brand new GM vehicle come with part of the bill of sale or a manual somewhere with what amounts to an EULA?

When you buy software, despite the mentality of many that you now "own" the software and can therefore do with it as you please, that is NOT the case since the EULA was something you agreed to upon opening the box (read all those little stickers and warnings), or upon downloading (read all the text that you clicked "OK" on), therefore you are not allowed to screw with the software. You may USE it within its design limitations, but usually can't change it or reverse engineer it.

I'm curious if vehicles, given the amount of computers they are now equipped with, include the same contractual obligations/agreements as part of the bill of sale signatures, or somewhere else in the paperwork.

A bit OT, but interesting from a legal perspective for the tuning side of things.

I see GM's when purchased as a mechanical device and hence when I purchase it it becomes my property just as a "house" or a "coffee pot" for that matter.
If I remember correctly several months past there was a class action lawsuit against GM for configuring the new generation ECM's to unreadable. Part of the suit involved small mechanic repair shops not being able to read GM's code once the vehicle was out of warranty. In turn, this was causing a backlog for repairs at GM dealerships and more or less a monopoly to the repair of GM vehicles.
I tried searching for it again and could not come up with a link. This is what I can remember from the info I read on this situation several months back. Don't hold me to my exact memory on this subject. But I think it holds value to this particular subject.

[Diaric]

Originally Posted by Surfacediver

If I remember correctly several months past there was a class action lawsuit against GM for configuring the new generation ECM's to unreadable. Part of the suit involved small mechanic repair shops not being able to read GM's code once the vehicle was out of warranty. In turn, this was causing a backlog for repairs at GM dealerships and more or less a monopoly to the repair of GM vehicles.
.

Those suits or fights have been going on for years, It involves the fair right to repair or something like that, where auto manufacturers keep making each successive line of vehicles need newer equipment to read and repair. It charges that they create a repair monopoly because they make it unaffordable for small guys to keep up with the technology to give the customer a fair choice.